Status of the River Frog, Rana heckscheri (Anura: Ranidae), in 



North Carolina 



Jeffrey C. Beane 



North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences 



P.O. Box 29555 



Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0555 



ABSTRACT-The river frog (Rana heckscheri), a large ranid occurring 

 in aquatic and riparian habitats in the southeastern United States, reach- 

 es the northern edge of its range in southeastern North Carolina, where 

 it has been recorded historically from a few scattered localities in the 

 Lumber and Cape Fear river systems. Currently listed by the state as a 

 species of Special Concern, R. heckscheri was last documented from 

 North Carolina in 1975. A survey was undertaken to determine the 

 frog's status in the state. Considerable field work has failed to yield any 

 current evidence of its existence in North Carolina, and it appears like- 

 ly that the species no longer occurs there. Reasons for its apparent dis- 

 appearance are unknown. 



The river frog (Rana heckscheri) is a large ranid occurring in associa- 

 tion with blackwater river habitats from southern Mississippi to southeastern 

 North Carolina (Sanders 1984, Conant and Collins 1991). The species is known 

 in North Carolina from only a few scattered localities in the Lumber and Cape 

 Fear river systems (Fig. 1). Little has been published on R. heckscheri in North 

 Carolina. Its occurrence in the state was first suggested by Brimley (1944), who 

 listed it among the state's fauna with some doubt on the basis of a single speci- 

 men of a frog found dead at a heron rookery at Battery Island in Brunswick 

 County on 13 June 1938. His tentative identification was apparently based sole- 

 ly on the frog's dark ventral coloration, and his brother, H. H. Brimley (1938), 

 remarked that "it was a noticeably black specimen, with very definite markings 

 showing on the inside of the thighs, so we brought it back ... to identify . . . but 

 it turned out to be nothing more than a common bull frog!" DePoe and Funder- 

 burg (1959) and Simmons and Hardy (1959) discounted that specimen as being 

 R. heckscheri, probably rightfully so, as the specimen apparently was not 

 retained and cannot be verified. 



DePoe and Funderburg (1959) reported a specimen of R. heckscheri from 

 Greenfield Lake in New Hanover County, collected 10 May 1948, but that specimen 

 (Cornell University 5496) was later identified as R. catesbeiana (Sanders 1984). 



69 



